ReviewHerzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie2020
[Electrical storm : Recognition and management].
Review in Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Life-Threatening Electrical Storm Following Liver Transplantation: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2024Article
- A successful case of electrical storm rescue after acute myocardial infarction.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Article
- Long-term prognosis of successful left ventricular substrate modification of electrical storm.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The electrical storm (ES) defined as ≥3 sustained episodes of ventricular tachycardia within a 24 h period comprises a wide spectrum of clinical entities. Mostly patients suffer from severe heart insufficiency and comorbidities making an immediate transfer into a heart center with multidisciplinary expertise in the treatment of ES mandatory. As these patients are often traumatized by ongoing tachycardia despite multiple cardioversions, early deep sedation and β‑blockade to break the vicious circle of sympathico-adrenergic hyperactivation is very effective. Multiple ICD discharges suggesting the diagnosis of ES are inadequate in one third of cases. Pharmacological suppression, frequency control or ablation of supraventricular tachycardias (SVT) help in most cases. In some cases "oversensing" demands optimization of ICD programming. Even so not all adequate ICD discharges, however, are necessary. Since every ICD discharge worsens the patient's prognosis, any kind of ICD discharge should be prevented as far as hemodynamically feasible. After clinical stabilization of the patient with simultaneous acquisition of ECG and testing for reversible causes of ES, ES should be terminated by external or internal cardioversion followed by urgent but elective therapy. Some cases of ES, however, may require immediate escalation of therapy with emergency ablation or revascularization sometimes with circulatory support systems. If ES still persists, a further step in escalation may be taken by cardiac sympathetic denervation. Due to the poor prognosis of patients after ES, close monitoring of the patient, preferably with telemedicine, is indicated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.